On May 21, 2020, the City of Cincinnati's Council passed an emergency ordinance that capped the fees that a third-party food delivery service could charge to a restaurant at 15% of the purchase price. Please see the ordinance below.

Ordinance (.pdf) (Links to an external site.) Below is what was highlighted from the ordinance and the focus of the question.

WHEREAS, restaurants, andparticularly small family-owned restaurantswith few locations, have limited bargainingpower to negotiate lower commissionfees with third-party, app-based deliveryplatforms due to only a few companies in themarketplace to provide such delivery services,and face dire financial circumstances duringthis COVID-19 pandemic because take-outand delivery are the only options to keep thebusiness in operation; andWHEREAS,cappingthecommission fee to a maximum of 15% of thepurchase price on delivery or pick-up orderswhile restaurants are unable to provideunrestricted dine-in service will accomplishthe fundamental government purpose ofeasing the financial burden on strugglingrestaurants during this public healthemergencyand promoting the availability ofprepared food via delivery service while notunduly burdening third-party, app-baseddelivery platforms; and

If you were a member of Cincinnati's City Council, would you have voted "yes" or "no" on this ordinance? Why or why not? In your defense of your vote, please discuss (at a minimum) the market for food delivery services, as well as the financial implications for consumers, workers, and business owners after the ordinance passes. I have highlighted two sections in the emergency ordinance that discuss these issues.

For your response post, choose a classmate who would have voted differently than you and briefly respond why you disagree with their vote.